In
the not too distant future, you may be required to
surrender some or all of your guns to the police or
military. How will you respond? About 165 years ago,
early Texans faced the same dilemma.
Following is their response.

The following is compiled
from history books listed at the end of this pamphlet If
you research the matter yourself, keep in mind that
various sources conflict in several details. In this
compilation, I try to include information from each
source to form an account that is both detailed and
interesting.

THE GROWING TYRANNY

Under the leadership of
General Santa Anna, the government of Mexico was
transformed into a military dictatorship (see the letter
by S.F. Austin, p. 85, Texas and the Texans), ignoring
the Constitution of 1824, which had cost many
lives and had secured liberties not previously enjoyed by
the people. The state of Coahuila did not cooperate with
Santa Anna's plans, and the state of Zacatecas rebelled,
but was brutally crushed by the military. One of Santa
Anna's "reforms" was to reduce the number of
the militia to one soldier for every five-hundred
inhabitants, and to disarm the remainder. This arbitrary
decree was a sufficient justification of Texas for her
subsequent acts. Every one who knows the Texans,
or who has heard of them, would naturally conclude that
they never would submit to be disarmed. Any government
that would attempt to disarm its people is despotic; and
any people that would submit to it deserves to be slaves!

Stephen F. Austin was
jailed in Mexico City, accused of fomenting revolution.
In early 1835 Santa Anna reopened the Customs House at
Anahuac. He again slapped duties on the colonists. He
sent a new man, Captain Antonio Tenorio, to Anahuac to
see that the Texans paid up.

The local legislature at
Monclova was gone--closed down by Santa Anna after it
tried to raise money by selling four hundred leagues of
Texas land to hungry U.S. speculators. Most Texans were
opposed to this step too--and no one liked being governed
from Monclova--but Santa Anna's solution left them even
worse off. They now had no government at all, and their
representatives were under arrest.

Along the coast Mexican
garrisons stepped up their campaign to stop smuggling and
collect customs duties. At Galveston they seized the
Texas schooner Martha, loaded with supplies for the
colonists. A message taken from a careless Mexican
courier hinted that even more troops were on the way.
Angrily the settlers burned some lumber ordered by
Captain Tenorio at Anahuac.

SOME TAKE ACTION, BUT THE
PEOPLE AREN'T READY AND REMAIN CONCILIATORY

William B. Travis had a
better idea. Late in June he raised a company of twenty-five
men and marched on Tenorio's headquarters. He
dramatically gave the Mexicans fifteen minutes to
surrender or be 'put to the sword.' Tenorio quickly
capitulated.

The colonists couldn't
adjust that easily. They were shocked at Travis' audacity.
This wasn't merely a case of smuggling, dodging customs
collectors, or playing a practical joke on Colonel
Bradburn. This was throwing out the garrison commander.
Practically open rebellion. Few were ready to go that far.

Apologies...regrets...stern
words for Travis. Repudiated, he lapsed into one of his
moody spells. He published a note in the Texas Republican
asking people to 'reserve judgment.' He morosely wrote a
friend that he felt ashamed.

SANTA ANNA MOVES TO
DESTROY THOSE WHO TOOK ACTION

At this point, Santa Anna
overplayed his hand. Deeming Travis' setback a sign of
weakness, he decided that this was the time to finish off
his enemies. During August he poured more troops into
Texas and told his brother-in-law, General Martin
Perfecto de Cos, to take personal command. Cos ordered
the arrest of Travis and several other Texas
troublemakers.

TEXANS RALLY ON THE SIDE
OF THEIR BRETHREN,NO LONGER CONCILIATORY

The Mexican leaders
completely misinterpreted the situation. The Texans' real
goal was to build a secure future without outside
interference. They rebuked Travis because he seemed to be
inviting a fight. Now they saw an infinitely greater
threat--martial law, military occupation, the arrest of
good friends. Almost overnight the pendulum swung the
other way, and the people of Texas turned violently
against Santa Anna.

Committees of Safety
sprang up in every town. The highly influential Telegraph
and Texas Register hammered away for liberty and freedom.
Travis discarded his moody gloom; his letters now sang of
'the hour that will try men's souls.' Then on September 1
came an electrifying development--Stephen F. Austin
suddenly reappeared from Mexico.

Next week a thousand
people jammed the banquet given in his honor in Brazoria.
The Room fell silent as the trusted leader rose to speak.
He had always preached moderation; after a year in
Mexican jails, how did he feel?

He left little doubt.
Santa Anna was destroying the people's rights.... And on
the question of Mexican troops in Texas, Austin was even
more specific. The people had a strong moral sense that 'would
not unite with any armed force sent against this country;
on the contrary, it would resist and repel it, and ought
to do so....'

SANTA ANNA TRIES TO DISARM
THE RESISTANCE

A week later General Cos
landed at Copano with 400 men. 'WAR is our only recourse,'
thundered a broadside from Austin. Unfazed, Cos headed
for San Antonio. Here the garrison commander Colonel
Ugartechea had his hands full, confiscating
weapons...searching houses...disbanding suspicious groups
that re-formed as fast as he broke them up.
Mexican policy was to seize arms and military stores in
Texan hands before real trouble started.

THE MILITARY MOVES IN TO
CONFISCATE HEAVY WEAPONS, HELD OFF BY A FEW BRAVE MEN WHO
STAND IN THE GAP

Word had just come of a
serious problem at Gonzales. The colonists there were
shining up a small cannon given them years ago to ward
off Indians. Ugartechea, acting under the decree
disarming citizens, sent a file of cavalrymen riding to
Gonzales with an order for the surrender of the gun.
Andrew Ponton, the Gonzales alcalde, received the order
and stalled for time. He sent a message stating he was
absent. He demanded an order from the political chief of
the Department of the Brazos before releasing it. The
noncommissioned officer in charge of the Mexican cavalry
left his men camped at Gonzales and rode back to San
Antonio de Bexar for further instructions from Colonel
Ugartechea. Meanwhile, Ponton buried the cannon in a
peach orchard and sent runners to the surrounding area
for armed assistance.

Not long after, the Texans
shed all pretense of ever surrendering the cannon. Joseph
D. Clements delivered the message to the Mexican army:
"I cannot, nor do I desire to deliver up the cannon...and
only through force will we yield."

Meanwhile, word was
spreading that the Texans at Gonzales needed help.
Following is a letter written by Stephen F. Austin when
he heard of the impending conflict:

The Committee of the
Jurisdiction of Austin has received the communication
directed to the Committee of Safety of Mina by you,
in the name of the people of Gonzales, under the date
of the 25th inst., stating that Colonel Ugartachea
had made a demand for the piece of cannon at that
place, and that the people, in a general meeting, had
refused to give it up. You state that, "from
every circumstance, and from information, the people
are justified in believing that this demand is only
made to get a pretext to make a sudden inroad and
attack upon that colony for marauding and other
purposes;" in consequence of which those people
request assistance to aid in repelling an attack,
should one be made.

The present movements
of the people of Texas are of a popular
and voluntary character, in defense of their constitutional
rights, which are threatened by military
invasion of an unconstitutional
character. The people are acting on the defensive;
and, therefore, there cannot be a doubt that it was
correct in the people of Gonzales, under this
principle, to detain the piece of cannon which was
given to them by the authorities of a constitutional
government, to defend themselves and the constitution,
if necessary.

On this principle, the
people of this, and of every other section of the
country, so far as this Committee is informed, are
ready to fly at a moment's warning to the defense of
those people, should they be attacked. Companies of
volunteers have already marched, and more are in
readiness, should they be needed, to repel an attack.

This Committee beg
leave to suggest that inasmuch as the position taken
by the country up to the present time, is purely
defensive, it is very important to keep this
principle constantly view, and to avoid
making attacks unless they should be necessary as a
measure of defence.

The eighteen men in
Gonzales, willing and able to conduct an organized fight,
removed all boats from the Guadalupe River, and hid the
ferry in a bayou north of town. Next they captured the
handful of Mexican soldiers waiting near town--but one
man escaped, and rode hallooing back to Bexar.

Meanwhile, volunteers
responding to the call to arms rushed to the scene, and
the little Texan force of 18 mushroomed to 150 on
September 30...167 on October 1.

Also at this time, Sara
Seely DeWitt and her daughter Evaline made the flag, back
then referred to as the Old Cannon Flag, now called the
Come and Take It flag. Depicted on a white cloth was a
cannon with a lone star above it, and the words "come
and take it" beneath the cannon. It was Texas' first
battle flag, and first lone star flag. [To my knowledge,
it is also the only flag that indirectly equates arms to
liberty, and that openly defies a tyrant's attempts at
gun control. Ed.]

On October 1, 1835,
Captain Francisco Castaneda arrived from San Antonio with
something less than two hundred men. Ugartechea intended
a show of force. Castaneda, blocked by the Guadalupe,
demanded the ferry be restored, and the cannon handed
over. There was some parleying, a demonstration by the
Mexican cavalry near the town, and considerable yelling
and taunting by the Texans, who dared the Mexicans to
"come and take it!" echoing the words
emblazoned on their newly created flag flying in the
breeze.

WITH THE PEOPLE OF TEXAS
BEHIND THEM,THE MILITIA MOVES AGAINST THE ENEMY

That night the Texans
silently slipped across the Guadalupe and formed a
defensive square. Rev. William P. Smith rode into the
square and addressed the Texans:

FELLOW-SOLDIERS: To
cap the climax of a long catalogue on injuries and
grievances attempted to be heaped upon us, the
government of Mexico, in the person of Santa Anna,
has sent an army to commence the disarming
system. Give up the cannon, and we may surrender our
small arms also, and at once to be the vassals
of the most imbecile and unstable government on earth.
But will Texas give up the cannon? Will she
surrender her small-arms? Every response is NO, NEVER!
Never will she submit to a degradation of that
character! Fellow-soldiers, the cause for
which we are contending is just, honorable and
glorious--our liberty! The same blood that animated
the hearts of our ancestors of '76 still flows warm
in our veins. Having waited several days for
the Mexican army to make an attack upon us, we have
now determined to attack them on tomorrow morning at
the dawn of day. Some of us may fall, but if we do,
let us be sure to fall with our face toward the enemy.
...

Fellow-soldiers, let
us march silently, obey the commands of our superior
officers, and united as one man, present a bold front
to the enemy. VICTORY WILL BE OURS! We have passed
the Rubicon, and we have born the insults and
indignities of Mexico until forbearance has ceased to
be a virtue. A resort to army is our only alternative;
WE MUST FIGHT AND WE WILL FIGHT. In numerical
strength, the nation against whom we contend is our
superior; but so just and so noble is the cause for
which we contend that the strong arm of Jehovah will
lead us on to victory, to glory and to empire. With
us, everything is at stake-our firesides, our wives,
our children, our country, our all! Great will be the
influence over the colonies resulting from the effort
we are about to make. We MUST SUSTAIN OURSELVES IN
THE CONTEST. This will inspire confidence in the
minds of our countrymen.

Fellow-soldiers, march
with bold hearts and steady steps to meet the enemy,
and let every arm be nerved, while our minds are
exercised with the happy reflection that the guarding
angels are directing our course. Let us go into
battle with the words of the immortal Patrick Henry,
before the Virginia house of Burgesses, deeply
impressed upon our hearts, when, with army extended
towards heaven, and with a voice of thunder, he
exclaimed in the most patriotic manner, GIVE ME
LIBERTY, OR GIVE ME DEATH!

After Smith's address, the
Texans resumed their advance toward the Mexican camp in
the fog shrouded dawn of October 2. They were sure
Castaneda planned to attack this day; they might as well
hit him first. Quietly, very quietly, they edged through
the fog. With them was the cannon, dug up from the peach
orchard where Albert Martin had buried it. It was loaded
with chains and scraps of iron.

The Texan militia
blundered into the Mexican pickets, but in the dark and
fog there could be no war. Everyone drew back and waited
until daybreak.

The fog lifted suddenly as
a curtain, showing both forces drawn up on an open
prairie. With the Come and Take It flag flying, the
Gonzales cannon fired, and Captain Castaneda immediately
requested a parley, asking why he was being attacked.

Colonel Moore, commander
of the Texans, explained that the Captain had demanded a
cannon given to the Texans for 'the defense of themselves
and the constitution and the laws of the country,' while
he, Castaneda, 'was acting under orders of the tyrant
Santa Anna, who had broken and trampled underfoot all the
state and federal constitutions of Mexico, except that of
Texas,' which last the Texans were prepared to defend.

Castaneda answered that 'he
was himself a republican, as were two-thirds of the
Mexican nation, but he was a professional officer of the
government,' and while that government had indeed
undergone certain surprising changes, it was the
government, and the people of Texas were bound to submit
to it.

Moore then suggested to
the Captain, if he were a republican, he should join the
revolution against tyranny by surrendering his command,
and join them in the fight. Captain Castaneda replied
stiffly that he would obey his orders. At this, Moore
returned to his own lines and ordered the Texans to open
fire. There was a brief skirmish, and the Mexican force
immediately abandoned the field and rode back toward San
Antonio.

NO LONGER WILL TEXANS OR
OTHER AMERICANS BE DISARMED BY TYRANTS!

Historian H. Yoakum's
words in 1855 bear repeating: "Every one who knows
the Texans, or who has heard of them, would naturally
conclude that they never would submit to be disarmed. Any
government that would attempt to disarm its people is
despotic; and any people that would submit to it deserves
to be slaves!"

SOME FINAL COMMENTS (NOT
FROM THE HISTORY BOOKS)

We have had enough of
tyrants seeking to disarm us so they can subjugate us to
their evil schemes. History has shown us that those
seeking to disarm us are indeed tyrants, and the enemies
of liberty. History has given us the flag that represents
our refusal to be disarmed, and it has given us examples
of men and women who fought and died for liberty. All
that is left for us in the present is to muster the
courage, intelligence, craftiness, endurance, commitment,
and knowledge of history to carry the fight through to
the finish.

Epilogue: DO SECOND AMENDMENT "ARMS" INCLUDE CANNONS?

Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. -Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788

The word 'arms' in the connection we find it in the Constitution of the United States, refers to the arms of a militiaman or soldier, and the word is used in its military sense. The arms of the infantry soldier are the musket and bayonet; of cavalry and dragoons, the saber, holster pistols and carbine; of the artillery, the field piece, siege gun, and mortar, with side arms. -English v State, Texas 473, 476 (1871-2).

"Gonzales Before and
After the ALAMO," pamphlet from the Gonzales Chamber
of Commerce and Agriculture.

History of Texas From
Its First Settlement in 1685 to Its Annexation to the
United States in 1846. H. Yoakum, Esq. Vol. 1 of 2.
Redfield 34 Beekman St., NY 1855. Facsimile by The Steck
Company of Austin, Texas.

History of the
Revolution in Texas, Particularly of the War of 1835
& 36, C. Hester Newell. Arno Press, 1973.

Lone Star, A History
of Texas and the Texans, T.R. Fehrenbach

Monuments Erected by
the State of Texas to Commemorate the Centenary of Texas
Independence. The Report of the Commission of Control for
Texas Centennial Celebrations, compiled by Harold
Schoen, Austin, 1938.

At every
turn, someone is trying to disarm us. As hostility to our
freedom increases, it is imperative that we recall our
forefathers and the efforts of various tyrants to disarm
them. The past holds parallels to the present, and can
guide us in our current struggles. You know that the
battles at Lexington and Concord, the start of the
American Revolution, erupted because British troops were
marching to seize the colonists' weapons at these two
locations. You may not be aware that the Texas revolution
started in a similar way: Mexican troops, General Santa
Anna's thugs, were marching on the town of Gonzales to
seize their cannon, but the people refused to surrender
their arms, and fought off the Mexicans. At this first
skirmish the Texans flew one of Texas' most famous flags:
"ole' Come And Take It."

The Come And Take It flag
and its history have always fascinated me, because it is
still relevant today--tyrants are still trying to take
our guns, and, like our forefathers, we will surrender
neither our guns nor our right to own them.

While pondering the
struggles our forefathers faced, and while admiring the
Come And Take It flag, I couldn't help but wish that we
in the present had a symbol as powerful and inspiring as
the Come And Take It flag was in 1835. Sure, the flag is
relevant in that tyrants are still trying to take our
guns, but no one is coming to take our breechloading,
black powder, smoothbore fieldpiece. The cannon on the
flag is largely symbolic of our struggle to retain our
modern firearms. Why couldn't we update the flag so it
represents our current struggle, while harkening back to
history--reminding everyone that the struggle to retain
our rights is as old as Texas and the USA? With a
historical flag representing our cause, it would be
apparent that we who fight those who would disarm
us are not extreme or radical, we are merely walking in
the footsteps and in the well-beaten paths first trod by
our forefathers. Our historic flag would declare
our historic cause.

To re-design the Come And
Take It flag for today wasn't very hard, because most of
the work had already been done by Sarah Lee Dewitt in
1835. Since the cannon was the only item that was
slightly dated, it made sense to replace it with a modern
firearm. It would need to be a firearm that someone, in
fact, many someones at many levels of government are
literally coming to take, and in many instances, have
already taken it. It would have to be American designed
and made. It would have to be easily recognizable even at
a long distance. It should be a military-style firearm so
there is no doubt that the right to keep and bear arms
includes these firearms. It should have the features that
are the target of todays tyrants: high-capacity magazine,
bayonet lug, and flash suppressor, and not necessarily
semi-automatic only.

The choice was easy to
make, because there is only one firearm meeting those
criteria. It was designed by an American, has been used
extensively by the US military, is instantly recognized
by everyone, and so on. That firearm, as you might have
guessed, is the Colt AR-15/M-16.

Retaining the styling from
the Come And Take It flag enables anyone to instantly
recognize the new Come And Take It flag as the 1835 flag
with only one change.

One change, but now, oh,
the new meaning it adds to the flag!

Now, no one can say the
flag is only about a struggle between Santa Anna's thugs
and Texans 160 years ago in the far away and distant past
that offers no bearing today and has no relevance in
today's struggle over gun control.

Now, anyone who sees the
flag will consider that history is repeating itself today,
and that those in power are aligned with tyrants of old--Santa
Anna, King George III--that gun control is
nothing new and is nothing more than the schemes of evil
men working to subject the good and the innocent to
tyranny and servitude. And perhaps, when people
see the flag they will choose the side of those resisting
the marching thugs, and will take their place in that
long line of patriots, minutemen, and freedom-fighters
who have stood against wrong for hundreds of years.

Perhaps if they are not
too familiar with the flag's history they will read about
it and discover that the only difference between
now and 1835 is the tyrants' names.

When we see the flag we
can remember that those standing in that long line of
history stood their ground. They did not back down, they
did not surrender, they did not compromise, even when the
cost was great. A number of the men at Gonzales died at
the Alamo, and, as the men of the American Revolution,
they sacrificed their lives, their fortunes, and their
sacred honors. How can we do any less?

Constitution of
the United States of America Article VI, Second Clause
"This Constitution...shall be the supreme Law of the
Land; and the Judges in every state shall be bound
thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any
State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Bill of Rights,
Article X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are
reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Bill of Rights,
Article II
"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed. "Declaration of Independence"We
hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men...are
endowedby their Creator with certain unalienable rights...."

The 1835 version of the Come And Take It
flag depicts an artillery weapon that was current military ordinance
back in 1835 (at least it was a diminutive version of then-modern
cannons). .50 BMG weapons are close modern counterparts to the Gonzales
cannon in that they, too, are diminutive artillery. (Interestingly, the
primary target of British attacks on Lexington and Concord were colonial
cannons; the small arms were a secondary target.) Much as in 1775 and
1835, current efforts are underway to ban, register, or re-classify .50
BMGs as Class III. To meet these threats to our liberty, we have
produced a flag with a .50 BMG rifle.

The Come And Take It flag serves three
major purposes:

1. To prompt people to examine gun
control from a historical perspective, so they can see from the past
that gun control has been the work of tyrants, and those resisting gun
control were standing for liberty;

2. To provide the pro-gun community with
a symbol encouraging them to fight in the face of overwhelming odds, and
more importantly, to never compromise the Second Amendment;

3. To warn those promoting gun control,
that they are walking in the footsteps of tyrants, and that we cannot
acquiesce to their destruction of our rights and liberty.

Epilogue: Do Second Amendment "Arms"
Include Cannons?

"Congress have no power to disarm the
militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the
soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the
sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government,
but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the
people." -Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788

"The word `arms' in the connection we
find it in the Constitution of the United States, refers to the arms of
a militiaman or soldier, and the word is used in its military sense. The
arms of the infantry soldier are the musket and bayonet; of cavalry and
dragoons, the saber, holster pistols and carbine; of the artillery, the
field piece, siege gun, and mortar, with side arms." -English v State,
Texas 473, 476 (1871-2)

"Cannon are constantly manufactured, when
demanded, to a very considerable extent, in the public armories of the
nation, and of the States, and on contracts, and for sale to
associations of citizens, and to individual purchasers, for use at home,
or for exportation." Tench Coxe, Dec, 8, 1812, Report of Acting
Secretary of the Treasury; Digest of Manufacturers; American State
Papers, 1832

Brief Version of:
History of
the 1835 Come And Take It FlagandWhy We Need
the Come And Take It Flag Todayby David C. Treibs

October 2, 1835

1990s

In
the not too distant future, you may be required to
surrender some or all of your guns to the police or
military. How will you respond? About 165 years ago,
early Texans faced the same dilemma.
Following is their response.

HISTORY OF THE OCT 2, 1835 COME
AND TAKE IT FLAG

Under the leadership of
General Santa Anna, the government of Mexico was
transformed into a military dictatorship, ignoring
the Constitution of 1824. The state of Coahuila
did not cooperate with Santa Anna's plans, and the state
of Zacatecas rebelled, but was brutally crushed by the
military. One of Santa Anna's "reforms" was to
reduce the number of the militia to one soldier for every
five-hundred inhabitants, and to disarm the remainder.
This arbitrary decree was a sufficient justification of
Texas for her subsequent acts. Every one who
knows the Texans, or who has heard of them, would
naturally conclude that they never would submit to be
disarmed. Any government that would attempt to disarm its
people is despotic; and any people that would submit to
it deserves to be slaves! (Yoakum)

As Mexican troops began
pouring into Texas, the people of Texas turned violently
against Santa Anna. Committees of Safety sprang up in
every town. Newspapers hammered away for liberty and
freedom. William B. Travis' letters sang of "the
hour that will try men's souls." Stephen F. Austin
spoke that Santa Anna was destroying the people's
rights, and Texans "would resist and repel"
"any armed force" sent against Texas.

As unrest increased, Santa
Anna's soldiers began confiscating weapons, searching
houses, disbanding suspicious groups that re-formed as
fast as they were broken up. A number of
soldiers marched to Gonzales to confiscate a small cannon
given them years ago to ward off Indians. The Gonzales
alcalde received the order to surrender the cannon, but
stalled for time, sending runners to the surrounding area
for armed assistance. Not long after, the Texans shed all
pretense of ever surrendering the cannon, and delivered
the message to the Mexican army: "I cannot, nor do I
desire to deliver up the cannon...and only through force
will we yield."

Word of the impending
conflict reached Stephen F. Austin, who sent letters
calling for volunteers to go to Gonzales, noting that
"The present movements of the people of
Texas are of a popular and voluntary character, in
defense of their constitutional rights,"
and that the people would "defend themselves and the
constitution, if necessary. ... [T]he position taken by
the country up to the present time, is purely defensive,"
and, Texans should "avoid making attacks
unless they should be necessary as a measure of defence."

Eighteen men in Gonzales,
willing and able to conduct an organized fight, removed
all boats from the Guadalupe River, and hid the ferry in
a bayou north of town. Volunteers responding to the call
to arms rushed to the scene, and the little Texan force
of 18 mushroomed to 167 by October 1.

During this time, Sara
Seely DeWitt and her daughter Evaline made the first Come
And Take It flag. It was Texas' first battle flag, and
first lone star flag. [To my knowledge, it is also the
only flag that indirectly equates arms to liberty, and
that openly defies a tyrant's attempts at gun control. Ed.]
From across the Guadalupe river, the Texans dared the
Mexicans to "Come and take it!" echoing the
words emblazoned on their newly created flag.

The Texans expected the
Mexicans to attack at any time, so they decided to strike
first. The night of Oct 1 the Texans crossed the river
and opened fire on the Mexican troops at first light on
Oct 2, sending the troops hurrying back to Bexar.

WHY WE NEED THE
COME AND TAKE IT FLAG TODAY

While pondering the
struggles our forefathers faced, and while admiring the
Come And Take It flag, I couldn't help but wish that we
in the present had a symbol as powerful and inspiring as
the Come And Take It flag was in 1835. Sure, the flag is
relevant in that tyrants are still trying to take our
guns, but no one is coming to take our breechloading,
black powder, smoothbore fieldpiece. The cannon on the
flag is largely symbolic of our struggle to retain our
modern firearms. Why couldn't we update the flag so it
represents our current struggle, while harkening back to
history--reminding everyone that the struggle to retain
our rights is as old as Texas and the USA? With a
historical flag representing our cause, it would be
apparent that we who fight those who would disarm
us are not extreme or radical, we are merely walking in
the footsteps and in the well-beaten paths first trod by
our forefathers. Our historic flag would declare
our historic cause.

Now, with an updated flag,
no one can say the flag is only about a struggle between
Santa Anna's thugs and Texans 160 years ago in the far
away and distant past that offers no bearing today and
has no relevance in today's struggle over gun control.

Now, anyone who sees the
flag will consider that history is repeating
itself today, and that those in power are
aligned with tyrants of old--Santa Anna, King George III--that
gun control is nothing new and is nothing more
than the schemes of evil men working to subject the good
and the innocent to tyranny and servitude. And
perhaps, when people see the flag, they will choose the
side of those resisting the marching thugs, and will take
their place in that long line of patriots, minutemen, and
freedom-fighters who have stood against wrong for
hundreds of years.

SOURCES for "History
of the 1835 Come And Take It Flag."

A Time to Stand,
Walter Lord. Harper & Row, 1961.

"Gonzales Before and
After the ALAMO," pamphlet from the Gonzales Chamber
of Commerce and Agriculture.

History of Texas From
Its First Settlement in 1685 to Its Annexation to the
United States in 1846. H. Yoakum, Esq. Vol. 1 of 2.
Redfield 34 Beekman St., NY 1855. Facsimile by The Steck
Company of Austin, Texas.

The unabridged versions of
these articles are at www.ComeAndTakeIt.com or enclose a
dollar to: Battle Flags, Etc.; 1141 Metzger Road;
Fredericksburg, Texas 78624. We sell both the 1835 and
the modern Come And Take It flags, and every flag of
every description. We don't compromise our principles or
our quality.

Constitution of
the United States of America Article VI, Second Clause
"This Constitution...shall be the supreme Law of the
Land; and the Judges in every state shall be bound
thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any
State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article II (Second
Amendment), Bill of Rights
"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,shall
not be infringed"

No man
thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well
as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just
addressed the House. But different men often see the same
subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it
will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if,
entertaining as I do opinions of a character very
opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments
freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony.
The question before the House is one of awful moment to
this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing
less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in
proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be
the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we
can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great
responsibility which we hold to God and our country.
Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through
fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as
guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of
disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere
above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is
natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We
are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and
listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us
into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a
great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed
to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not,
and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly
concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever
anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the
whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by
which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of
experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but
by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what
there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for
the last ten years to justify those hopes with which
gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the
House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition
has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will
prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be
betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious
reception of our petition comports with those warlike
preparations which cover our waters and darken our land.
Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and
reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to
be reconciled that force must be called in to win back
our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are
the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments
to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means
this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to
submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible
motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this
quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation
of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are
meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are
sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which
the British ministry have been so long forging. And what
have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we
have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we
anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have
held the subject up in every light of which it is capable;
but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty
and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which
have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech
you, sir, deceive ourselves.

Sir, we have done
everything that could be done to avert the storm which is
now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated;
we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before
the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest
the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our
petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have
produced additional violence and insult; our
supplications have been disregarded; and we have been
spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In
vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of
peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for
hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve
inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have
been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon
the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged,
and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon
until the glorious object of our contest shall be
obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight!
An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is
left us!

They tell us, sir, that we
are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary.
But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week,
or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed,
and when a British guard shall be stationed in every
house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and
inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual
resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the
delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have
bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a
proper use of those means which the God of nature hath
placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in
the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that
which we possess, are invincible by any force which our
enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not
fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides
over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up
friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is
not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the
active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If
we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to
retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in
submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their
clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is
inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it
come.

It is in vain, sir, to
extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--
but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The
next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our
ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are
already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it
that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so
dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price
of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know
not what course others may take; but as for me, give me
liberty or give me death!